Abstract

Rapid Judgments (RJs) are quick assessments based on indirect verbal and nonverbal cues that are known to be associated with deception. RJs are advantageous because they eliminate the need for expensive detection equipment and only require minimal training for coders with relatively accurate judgments. Results of testing on two different datasets showed that trained coders were reliably making RJs after watching both long and short interaction segments but their judgments were not more accurate than the expert interviewers. The RJs did not discriminate between truth and deception as hypothesized. This raises more questions about the conditions under which making RJs from verbal and nonverbal cues achieves accurate detection of veracity.

title = "The Viability of Using Rapid Judgments as a Method of Deception Detection",

abstract = "Rapid Judgments (RJs) are quick assessments based on indirect verbal and nonverbal cues that are known to be associated with deception. RJs are advantageous because they eliminate the need for expensive detection equipment and only require minimal training for coders with relatively accurate judgments. Results of testing on two different datasets showed that trained coders were reliably making RJs after watching both long and short interaction segments but their judgments were not more accurate than the expert interviewers. The RJs did not discriminate between truth and deception as hypothesized. This raises more questions about the conditions under which making RJs from verbal and nonverbal cues achieves accurate detection of veracity.",

T1 - The Viability of Using Rapid Judgments as a Method of Deception Detection

AU - Dunbar, Norah E.

AU - Jensen, Matthew L.

AU - Harvell-Bowman, Lindsey A.

AU - Kelley, Katherine M.

AU - Burgoon, Judee K.

PY - 2017/4/3

Y1 - 2017/4/3

N2 - Rapid Judgments (RJs) are quick assessments based on indirect verbal and nonverbal cues that are known to be associated with deception. RJs are advantageous because they eliminate the need for expensive detection equipment and only require minimal training for coders with relatively accurate judgments. Results of testing on two different datasets showed that trained coders were reliably making RJs after watching both long and short interaction segments but their judgments were not more accurate than the expert interviewers. The RJs did not discriminate between truth and deception as hypothesized. This raises more questions about the conditions under which making RJs from verbal and nonverbal cues achieves accurate detection of veracity.

AB - Rapid Judgments (RJs) are quick assessments based on indirect verbal and nonverbal cues that are known to be associated with deception. RJs are advantageous because they eliminate the need for expensive detection equipment and only require minimal training for coders with relatively accurate judgments. Results of testing on two different datasets showed that trained coders were reliably making RJs after watching both long and short interaction segments but their judgments were not more accurate than the expert interviewers. The RJs did not discriminate between truth and deception as hypothesized. This raises more questions about the conditions under which making RJs from verbal and nonverbal cues achieves accurate detection of veracity.